Search

Your search keyword '"Nana Gomes"' showing total 10 results
Start Over Author "Nana Gomes"
10 results on '"Nana Gomes"'

1. Patient outcomes following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: protocol for a multicenter, international, cohort study (Global Gynaecological Oncology Surgical Outcomes Collaborative)

Author

Faiza Gaba, Karen Ash, Oleg Blyuss, Nicolò Bizzarri, Paul Kamfwa, Pedro T Ramirez, Ioannis C Kotsopoulos, Dhivya Chandrasekaran, Nana Gomes, John Butler, Marielle Nobbenhuis, Thomas Ind, Owen Heath, Desmond Barton, Arjun Jeyarajah, Elly Brockbank, Alexandra Lawrence, James Dilley, Ranjit Manchanda, Saurabh Phadnis, and GO SOAR

Subjects
Oncology, Obstetrics and Gynecology
Abstract

BackgroundThe Global Gynecological Oncology Surgical Outcomes Collaborative (GO SOAR) has developed a network of gynecological oncology surgeons, surgical departments, and other interested parties that have the long-term ability to collaborate on outcome studies. Presented is the protocol for the GO SOAR2 study.Primary ObjectivesTo compare survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery, between delayed cytoreductive surgery and no surgery (chemotherapy alone); and international variations in access to cytoreductive surgery for women with stage III–IV epithelial ovarian cancer.Study HypothesesThere is no difference in survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery; there is poorer survival with no surgery compared with delayed cytoreductive surgery; and there are international disparities in prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery in women with stage III–IV epithelial ovarian cancer.Trial DesignInternational, multicenter, mixed-methods cohort study. Participating centers, will review medical charts/electronic records of patients who had been consecutively diagnosed with stage III–IV ovarian cancer between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2021. Qualitative interviews will be conducted to identify factors determining international variations in prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery.Major Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaInclusion criteria include women with stage III–IV epithelial ovarian cancer, undergoing interval (after 3–4 cycles of chemotherapy) or delayed (≥5 cycles of chemotherapy) cytoreductive surgeries or no cytoreductive surgery (≥5 cycles of chemotherapy alone).Primary EndpointsOverall survival (defined from date of diagnosis to date of death); progression-free survival (defined from date of diagnosis to date of first recurrence); facilitator/barriers to prevalent practice and access to cytoreductive surgery.Sample SizeIn order to determine whether there is a difference in survival following interval and delayed cytoreductive surgery and no surgery, data will be abstracted from 1000 patients.Estimated Dates for Completing Accrual and Presenting ResultsIt is estimated that recruitment will be completed by 2023, and results published by 2024.Trial RegistrationNCT05523804

Published
2022

2. SUCCOR Nodes: May Sentinel Node Biopsy Determine the Need for Adjuvant Treatment?

Author

Arantxa Berasaluce Gómez MD, Nerea Martín-Calvo MD, Félix Boria MD, Nabil Manzour MD, Enrique Chacón MD, Nicolò Bizzarri MD, Luis Chiva MD, Alejandra, Martinez, Alfonso, Quesada, Ali, Kucukmetin, Alicia, Vázquez, Aljosa, Mandic, Andrea, Casajuana, Andreas, Kavallaris, Anna, Fagotti, Anna, Perrone, Annamaria, Ferrero, Arantxa, Lekuona, Arno, Uppin, Artem, Stepanyan, Benito, Chiofalo, Bibiana, Morillas, Carmen, Tauste, Claudia, Andrade, Constantijne, Mom, Cosima, Brucker, Cosmin-Paul, Sarac, Daniel, Vázquez-Vicente, David, Cibula, Denis, Querleu, Diego, Erasun, Dilyara, Kaidarova, Dimitrios, Tsolakidis, Dimitros, Haidopoulos, Dmytro, Golub, Eduard-Aexandru, Bonci, Elif, Aksahin, Elisabete, Gonçalves, Enrique, Moratalla, Erbil, Karaman, Eva, Myriokefalitaki, Fabio, Ghezzi, Fabrice, Narducci, Fernando, Roldan, Francesco, Raspagliesi, Frédéric, Goffin, Frederic, Grandjean, Frédéric, Guyon, Fuat, Demirkiran, Gabriel, Fiol, Galina, Chakalova, Gemma, Mancebo, George, Vorgias, Gerhard, Gebauer, Gesine, Meili, Gines, Hernandez-Cortes, Giorgio, Bogani, Gloria, Cordeiro, Goran, Vujić, Gustavo, Mendinhos, Hans, Trum, Hélène, Bonsang-Kitzis, Herman, Haller, Ignace, Vergote, Ignacio, Zapardiel, Igor, Aluloski, Igor, Berlev, Imre, Pete, Ioannis, Kalogiannidis, Ioannis, Kotsopoulos, Iryna, Yezhova, Javier, Díez, Feron, Jean G., Jens-Peter, Scharf, Jogchum, Beltman, Jolien, Haesen, Jordi, Ponce, Jorge, Cea, Jose Ángel Mínguez, José, García, Juan, Arévalo-Serrano, Juan, Gilabert, Juan Luis Alcazar, Kersti, Kukk, Khadra, Galaal, Laura, Cárdenas, Laurentiu, Pirtea, Mereu, Liliana, Luigi Pedone Anchora, Lukas, Dostalek, Lukasz, Klasa, Maja, Pakižimre, Manuela, Undurraga, Marcin, Jedryka, Margarida, Bernardino, Maria, Alonso-Espias, María Belén Martín-Salamanca, Maria, Cuadra, Mariana, Tavares, Mario, Malzoni, Mathias, Fehr, Mathieu, Luyckx, Maximilian, Lanner, Meelis, Leht, Mehmet, Meydanli, Michael, Mallmann, Mihai, Căpîlna, Mikulás, Redecha, Milena, Mitrovic, Maenpaa, Minna M., Miriam, Guijarro, Nabil, Abdalla, Nana, Gomes, Natalia, Povolotskaya, Nikola, Badzakov, Octavio, Arencibia, Özgür, Akbayir, Pere, Cavalle, Petra, Zusterzeel, Philip, Rolland, Pluvio, Coronado, Rasiah, Bharathan, Reeli, Saaron, Rita, Sousa, Robert, Fruscio, Robert, Jach, Robert, Poka, Rosa, Barrachina, Santiago, Domingo, Sara, Morales, Sedat, Akgöl, Sergi, Fernandez-Gonzalez, Shamistan, Aliyev, Sofía, Herrero, Soledad, Fidalgo, Sonia, Prader, Špela, Smrkolj, Stamatios, Petousis, Stefan, Kovachev, Taner, Turan, Tayfun, Toptas, Teresa, Castellanos, Teresa Diniz da Costa, Tiermes, Marina, Vanna, Zanagnolo, Victor, Martin, Virginia, Gonzalez, Vladimír Študent &amp, and Vladyslav, Sukhin

Published
2023

6. SUCCOR Risk: Design and Validation of a Recurrence Prediction Index for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Author

Manzour, Nabil, Chiva, Luis, Chacón, Enrique, Martin-Calvo, Nerea, Boria, Felix, Minguez, José A, Alcazar, Juan, L, Vanna, Zanagnolo, Denis, Querleu, Mihai, Căpîlna, Anna, Fagotti, Ali, Kucukmetin, Constantijne, Mom, Galina, Chakalova, Shamistan, Aliyev, Mario, Malzoni, Fabrice, Narducci, Octavio, Arencibia, Francesci, Raspagliesi, Tayfun, Toptas, David, Cibula, Dilyara, Kaidarova, Mehmet, Meydanli, Mariana, Tavares, Dmytro, Golub, Anna, Perrone, Robert, Poka, Dimitrios, Tsolakidis, Goran, Vujić, Marcin, Jedryka, Petra, Zusterzeel, Jogchum, Beltman, Frédéric, Goffin, Dimitros, Haidopoulos, Herman, Haller, Robert, Jach, Iryna, Yezhova, Igor, Berlev, Margarida, Bernardino, Rasiah, Bharathan, Maximilian, Lanner, Vladyslav, Sukhin, Jean, G Feron, Robert, Fruscio, Kersti, Kukk, Jordi, Ponce, Nabil, Abdalla, Özgür, Akbayir, Sedat, Akgöl, Elif, Aksahin, Maria, Alonso-Espias, Igor, Aluloski, Claudia, Andrade, Nikola, Badzakov, Rosa, Barrachina, Giorgio, Bogani, Eduard-Aexandru, Bonci, Hélène, Bonsang-Kitzis, Cosima, Brucker, Laura, Cárdenas, Andrea, Casajuana, Pere, Cavalle, Jorge, Cea, Benito, Chiofalo, Gloria, Cordeiro, Pluvio, Coronado, Maria, Cuadra, Javier, Díez, Teresa Diniz da Costa, Santiago, Domingo, Lukas, Dostalek, Fuat, Demirkiran, Diego, Erasun, Mathias, Fehr, Sergi, Fernandez-Gonzalez, Soledad, Fidalgo, Gabriel, Fiol, Khadra, Galaal, José, García, Gerhard, Gebauer, Fabio, Ghezzi, Juan, Gilabert, Nana, Gomes, Elisabete, Gonçalves, Virginia, Gonzalez, Frederic, Grandjean, Miriam, Guijarro, Frédéric, Guyon, Jolien, Haesen, Gines, Hernandez-Cortes, Sofía, Herrero, Imre, Pete, Ioannis, Kalogiannidis, Erbil, Karaman, Andreas, Kavallaris, Lukasz, Klasa, Ioannis, Kotsopoulos, Stefan, Kovachev, Meelis, Leht, Arantxa, Lekuona, Mathieu, Luyckx, Michael, Mallmann, Gemma, Mancebo, Aljosa, Mandic, Tiermes, Marina, Victor, Martin, María Belén Martín-Salamanca, Alejandra, Martinez, Gesine, Meili, Gustavo, Mendinhos, Mereu, Liliana, Milena, Mitrovic, Sara, Morales, Enrique, Moratalla, Bibiana, Morillas, Eva, Myriokefalitaki, Maja, Pakižimre, Stamatios, Petousis, Laurentiu, Pirtea, Natalia, Povolotskaya, Sonia, Prader, Alfonso, Quesada, Mikuláš, Redecha, Fernando, Roldan, Philip, Rolland, Reeli, Saaron, Cosmin-Paul, Sarac, Jens-Peter, Scharf, Špela, Smrkolj, Rita, Sousa, Artem, Stepanyan, Vladimír, Študent, Carmen, Tauste, Hans, Trum, Taner, Turan, Manuela, Undurraga, Arno, Uppin, Alicia, Vázquez, Ignace, Vergote, George, Vorgias, Ignacio, Zapardiel, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development (AR&D), Obstetrics and gynaecology, CCA - Imaging and biomarkers, Manzour, N, Chiva, L, Chacon, E, Martin-Calvo, N, Boria, F, Minguez, J, Alcazar, J, Zanagnolo, V, Querleu, D, Capilna, M, Fagotti, A, Kucukmetin, A, Mom, C, Chakalova, G, Aliyev, S, Malzoni, M, Narducci, F, Arencibia, O, Raspagliesi, F, Toptas, T, Cibula, D, Kaidarova, D, Meydanli, M, Tavares, M, Golub, D, Perrone, A, Poka, R, Tsolakidis, D, Vujic, G, Jedryka, M, Zusterzeel, P, Beltman, J, Goffin, F, Haidopoulos, D, Haller, H, Jach, R, Yezhova, I, Berlev, I, Bernardino, M, Bharathan, R, Lanner, M, Sukhin, V, Feron, J, Fruscio, R, Kukk, K, Ponce, J, Abdalla, N, Akbayir, O, Akgol, S, Aksahin, E, Alonso-Espias, M, Aluloski, I, Andrade, C, Badzakov, N, Barrachina, R, Bogani, G, Bonci, E, Bonsang-Kitzis, H, Brucker, C, Cardenas, L, Casajuana, A, Cavalle, P, Cea, J, Chiofalo, B, Cordeiro, G, Coronado, P, Cuadra, M, Diez, J, da Costa, T, Domingo, S, Dostalek, L, Demirkiran, F, Erasun, D, Fehr, M, Fernandez-Gonzalez, S, Fidalgo, S, Fiol, G, Galaal, K, Garcia, J, Gebauer, G, Ghezzi, F, Gilabert, J, Gomes, N, Goncalves, E, Gonzalez, V, Grandjean, F, Guijarro, M, Guyon, F, Haesen, J, Hernandez-Cortes, G, Herrero, S, Pete, I, Kalogiannidis, I, Karaman, E, Kavallaris, A, Klasa, L, Kotsopoulos, I, Kovachev, S, Leht, M, Lekuona, A, Luyckx, M, Mallmann, M, Mancebo, G, Mandic, A, Marina, T, Martin, V, Martin-Salamanca, M, Martinez, A, Meili, G, Mendinhos, G, Mereu, L, Mitrovic, M, Morales, S, Moratalla, E, Morillas, B, Myriokefalitaki, E, Pakizimre, M, Petousis, S, Pirtea, L, Povolotskaya, N, Prader, S, Quesada, A, Redecha, M, Roldan, F, Rolland, P, Saaron, R, Sarac, C, Scharf, J, Smrkolj, S, Sousa, R, Stepanyan, A, Student, V, Tauste, C, Trum, H, Turan, T, Undurraga, M, Uppin, A, Vazquez, A, Vergote, I, Vorgias, G, and Zapardiel, I

Subjects
cervical cancer, Cevical cancer, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Hysterectomy, Prognosis, Risk Assessment, Women's cancers Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 17], conization, Settore MED/40 - GINECOLOGIA E OSTETRICIA, Oncology, Recurrence, radical hysterectomy, Humans, Female, Surgery, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Neoplasm Staging, Retrospective Studies
Abstract

Objective Based on the SUCCOR study database, our primary objective was to identify the independent clinical pathological variables associated with the risk of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer who underwent a radical hysterectomy. Our secondary goal was to design and validate a risk predictive index (RPI) for classifying patients depending on the risk of recurrence. Methods Overall, 1116 women were included from January 2013 to December 2014. We randomly divided our sample into two cohorts: discovery and validation cohorts. The test group was used to identify the independent variables associated with relapse, and with these variables, we designed our RPI. The index was applied to calculate a relapse risk score for each participant in the validation group. Results A previous cone biopsy was the most significant independent variable that lowered the rate of relapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17–0.60). Additionally, patients with a tumor diameter >2 cm on preoperative imaging assessment (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.33–3.5) and operated by the minimally invasive approach (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.00–2.57) were more likely to have a recurrence. Based on these findings, patients in the validation cohort were classified according to the RPI of low, medium, or high risk of relapse, with rates of 3.4%, 9.8%, and 21.3% observed in each group, respectively. With a median follow-up of 58 months, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 97.2% for the low-risk group, 88.0% for the medium-risk group, and 80.5% for the high-risk group (p < 0.001). Conclusion Previous conization to radical hysterectomy was the most powerful protective variable of relapse. Our risk predictor index was validated to identify patients at risk of recurrence.

Published
2022

7. Chemotherapy Response Score Predicts Surgical Outcome and Prognosis in Tubo-Ovarian/Primary Peritoneal Cancers: A Retrospective Analysis in a Tertiary Care Centre in UK

Author

Nana Gomes, Asima Mukhopadhyay, Ali Kucukmetin, and Anirban Dasgupta

Subjects
Oncology, medicine.medical_specialty, Chemotherapy, 030219 obstetrics & reproductive medicine, medicine.diagnostic_test, Proportional hazards model, business.industry, medicine.medical_treatment, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cancer, respiratory system, medicine.disease, Debulking, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Surgical oncology, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Internal medicine, Radiological weapon, Biopsy, otorhinolaryngologic diseases, medicine, business, Chemotherapy response
Abstract

To assess whether chemotherapy response score (CRS) is associated with surgical end-result in interval debulking surgery (IDS) for tubo-ovarian cancer patients and determine its prognostic significance. CRS is a histopathological three-tier score for assessing tumour regression in omentectomy specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), and original study concluded that prognostically, CRS is more important than completeness of cytoreduction (CC) in IDS. This has not been proved by other validation studies. There is a conflict in evidence regarding significance of improvement of overall survival (OS) with CRS-3 in available literature. Evidence of association of CRS with radiological and biochemical (CA-125 decline) response is lacking and conflicting. Patients who underwent IDS between 2010 and 2017 were retrospectively analysed using omental CRS scoring. Surgical end-result and clinico-pathological data were collected and correlated with CRS. Recurrence was assessed radiologically, OS and progression-free survival (PFS) calculated in the three histopathological subgroups, and compared with clinical variables using Cox proportional hazard model and log-rank test. Among 201 patients who underwent IDS, 82 patients had minimal response (CRS-1), 65 moderate (CRS-2) and 54 had excellent response (CRS-3). Seventy-seven patients (38%) had CC and 100 patients had optimal cytoreduction. There was an association between CC and CRS-3 (p

Published
2021

8. Are trainees working in obstetrics and gynecology confident and competent in the care of frail gynecological oncology patients?

Author

Yee-Loi Louise Wan, Linden Stocker, Rhianna Davies, Narthana Ilenkovan, Mohamed Abdelrahman, James P Beirne, Malcolm Farquharson, Laura Parnell, Michael P. Rimmer, Tabassum Khan, Anna Collins, Nana Gomes, Gemma L Owens, Elaine Y.L. Leung, Vanitha N Sivalingam, Peter Sanderson, James Dilley, Eleanor K. Jones, Diana Frimpong, Sadie Jones, Neil A J Ryan, Michael Wilkinson, Siewchee Wong, Rasiah Bharathan, Mohamed Otify, Sarah Hawco, and Dominic Blake

Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty, Students, Medical, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Frail Elderly, Specialty, Audit, Subspecialty, Medical Oncology, 03 medical and health sciences, surgical oncology, 0302 clinical medicine, Obstetrics and gynaecology, Multidisciplinary approach, Surveys and Questionnaires, Medicine, Humans, 030212 general & internal medicine, Curriculum, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Gynecological oncology, Internet, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, business.industry, ResearchInstitutes_Networks_Beacons/mcrc, gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology, postoperative care, Self Concept, United Kingdom, Obstetrics, Oncology, Education, Medical, Graduate, Geriatrics, Gynecology, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Family medicine, Delirium, Female, Clinical Competence, medicine.symptom, business, Ireland
Abstract

IntroductionOlder patients undergoing cancer surgery are at increased risk of post-operative complications, prolonged hospital stay, and mortality. Identification of frailty can help predict patients at high risk of peri-operative complications and allow a collaborative, multidisciplinary team approach to their care. A survey was conducted to assess the confidence and knowledge of trainees in obstetrics and gynecology regarding identification and management of peri-operative issues encountered in frail gynecological oncology patients.MethodsA web-based survey was distributed via the Audit and Research in Gynaecological Oncology (ARGO) collaborative and UK Audit and Research Collaborative in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (UKARCOG) . The survey on the management of frail peri-operative patients was disseminated to doctors-in-training (trainees) working in obstetrics and gynecology in the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland. Specialty (ST1–7), subspecialty, and general practice trainees, non-training grade doctors, and foundation year doctors currently working in obstetrics and gynecology were eligible. Consultants were excluded. Study data were collected using REDCAP software hosted at the University of Manchester. Responses were collected over a 6-week period between January and February 2020.ResultsOf the 666 trainees who participated, 67% (425/666) reported inadequate training in peri-operative management of frail patients. Validated frailty assessment tools were used by only 9% (59/638) of trainees and less than 1% (4/613) were able to correctly identify all the diagnostic features of frailty. Common misconceptions included the use of chronological age and gender in frailty assessments. The majority of trainees (76.5%, 448/586) correctly answered a series of questions relating to mental capacity; however, only 6% (36/606) were able to correctly identify all three diagnostic features of delirium. A total of 87% (495/571) of trainees supported closer collaboration with geriatricians and a multidisciplinary approach.ConclusionsObstetrics and gynecology trainees reported inadequate training in the peri-operative care of frail gynecological oncology patients, and overwhelmingly favored input from geriatricians. Routine use of validated frailty assessment tools may aid diagnosis of frailty in the peri-operative setting. There is an unmet need for formal education in the management of frail surgical patients within the UK and Irish obstetrics and gynecology curriculum.

Published
2020

9. Investigating the possible impact of peritoneal tumor exposure amongst women with early stage cervical cancer treated with minimally invasive approach

Author

Valerio Gallotta, Luigi Pedone Anchora, Ali Kucukmetin, Anna Fagotti, Giovanni Scambia, Stuart Rundle, Nicolò Bizzarri, Vittoria Carbone, Francesco Cosentino, Nana Gomes, Gabriella Ferrandina, Vito Chiantera, Camilla Fedele, Luigi Carlo Turco, Nithya Ratnavelu, Pedone Anchora L., Bizzarri N., Kucukmetin A., Turco L.C., Gallotta V., Carbone V., Rundle S., Ratnavelu N., Cosentino F., Chiantera V., Fagotti A., Fedele C., Gomes N., Ferrandina G., and Scambia G.

Subjects
Multivariate analysis, Peritoneal tumor, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Colpotomy, 0302 clinical medicine, Risk Factors, 80 and over, Radical hysterectomy, Stage (cooking), Prospective cohort study, Laparoscopy, Peritoneal Cavity, Cervical cancer, Aged, 80 and over, 030219 obstetrics & reproductive medicine, medicine.diagnostic_test, Hazard ratio, Minimally invasive, Peritoneal contamination, General Medicine, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Survival Rate, Oncology, Italy, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Lymphatic Metastasis, Female, Adult, medicine.medical_specialty, 03 medical and health sciences, Internal medicine, medicine, Humans, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures, Propensity Score, Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Retrospective Studies, business.industry, medicine.disease, Confidence interval, Settore MED/40 - GINECOLOGIA E OSTETRICIA, Lymph Node Excision, Surgery, Neoplasm Grading, business
Abstract

Introduction Recent findings show a detrimental impact of the minimally invasive approach on patients with early stage cervical cancer (ECC). Reasons beyond these results are unclear. The aim of the present article is to investigate the possible role of peritoneal contamination during intracorporeal colpotomy. Methods patients with early stage cervical cancer were divided into 2 groups: no intraperitoneal exposure (N-IPE) intraperitoneal exposure (IPE) during minimally invasive surgery. Patients of the 2 groups were propensity-matched according to the major risk factors. Results 226 cases of the IPE group had a significant worst prognosis than the 142 cases of the N-IPE group (4.5-years disease free survival: 86.6% vs 95.9% respectively, p = 0.005), while N-IPE had similar survival to open surgery (4.5-years disease free survival: 95.0% vs 90.5% respectively, p = 0.164). Distant recurrence was more frequent among IPE patients with a borderline significance (3.5% vs 0.4% among IPE and N-IPE respectively, p = 0.083). On multivariate analysis, intraperitoneal tumor exposure was an independent prognostic factors for worse survival; patients belonging to the N-IPE group had a risk of recurrence of about 3-fold lower compared to patients of the IPE group (hazard ratio: 0.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.15–0.88, p = 0.025). Conclusion it would be advisable that further prospective studies investigating the efficacy of different surgical approach in ECC take into consideration of this issue. Moreover, all other measures that could potentially prevent peritoneal exposure of tumor should be adopted during minimally invasive surgery for early stage cervical cancer to provide higher survival outcomes.

Published
2020

10. SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer

Author

Chiva, Luis, Zanagnolo, Vanna, Querleu, Denis, Martin-Calvo, Nerea, Arévalo-Serrano, Juan, Căpîlna, Mihai Emil, Fagotti, Anna, Kucukmetin, Ali, Mom, Constantijne, Chakalova, Galina, Aliyev, Shamistan, Malzoni, Mario, Narducci, Fabrice, Arencibia, Octavio, Raspagliesi, Francesco, Toptas, Tayfun, Cibula, David, Kaidarova, Dilyara, Meydanli, Mehmet Mutlu, Tavares, Mariana, Golub, Dmytro, Perrone, Anna Myriam, Poka, Robert, Tsolakidis, Dimitrios, Vujić, Goran, Jedryka, Marcin A, Zusterzeel, Petra L M, Beltman, Jogchum Jan, Goffin, Frederic, Haidopoulos, Dimitrios, Haller, Herman, Jach, Robert, Yezhova, Iryna, Berlev, Igor, Bernardino, Margarida, Bharathan, Rasiah, Lanner, Maximilian, Maenpaa, Minna M, Sukhin, Vladyslav, Feron, Jean-Guillaume, Fruscio, Robert, Kukk, Kersti, Ponce, Jordi, Minguez, Jose Angel, Vázquez-Vicente, Daniel, Castellanos, Teresa, Chacon, Enrique, Alcazar, Juan, Luis, Nabil, Abdalla, Özgür, Akbayir, Sedat, Akgöl, Elif, Aksahin, Shamistan, Aliyev, Maria, Alonso-Espias, Igor, Aluloski, Claudia, Andrade, Nikola, Badzakov, Rosa, Barrachina, Giorgio, Bogani, Eduard-Aexandru, Bonci, Hélène, Bonsang-Kitzis, Felix, Boria, Cosima, Brucker, Laura, Cárdenas, Andrea, Casajuana, Pere, Cavalle, Jorge, Cea, Benito, Chiofalo, Gloria, Cordeiro, Pluvio, Coronado, Maria, Cuadra, Javier, Díez, Teresa Diniz da Costa, Santiago, Domingo, Lukas, Dostalek, Fuat, Demirkiran, Diego, Erasun, Mathias, Fehr, Sergi, Fernandez-Gonzalez, Annamaria, Ferrero, Soledad, Fidalgo, Gabriel, Fiol, Khadra, Galaal, José, García, Gerhard, Gebauer, Fabio, Ghezzi, Juan, Gilabert, Nana, Gomes, Elisabete, Gonçalves, Virginia, Gonzalez, Frederic, Grandjean, Miriam, Guijarro, Frédéric, Guyon, Jolien, Haesen, Gines, Hernandez-Cortes, Sofía, Herrero, Imre, Pete, Ioannis, Kalogiannidis, Erbil, Karaman, Andreas, Kavallaris, Lukasz, Klasa, Ioannis, Kotsopoulos, Stefan, Kovachev, Meelis, Leht, Arantxa, Lekuona, Mathieu, Luyckx, Michael, Mallmann, Gemma, Mancebo, Aljosa, Mandic, Nabil, Manzour, Tiermes, Marina, Victor, Martin, María Belén Martín-Salamanca, Alejandra, Martinez, Gesine, Meili, Gustavo, Mendinhos, Mereu, Liliana, Milena, Mitrovic, Sara, Morales, Enrique, Moratalla, Bibiana, Morillas, Eva, Myriokefalitaki, Maja, Pakižimre, Stamatios, Petousis, Laurentiu, Pirtea, Natalia, Povolotskaya, Sonia, Prader, Alfonso, Quesada, Mikuláš, Redecha, Fernando, Roldan, Philip, Rolland, Reeli, Saaron, Cosmin-Paul, Sarac, Jens-Peter, Scharf, Špela, Smrkolj, Rita, Sousa, Artem, Stepanyan, Vladimír, Študent, Carmen, Tauste, Hans, Trum, Taner, Turan, Manuela, Undurraga, Arno, Uppin, Alicia, Vázquez, Ignace, Vergote, George, Vorgias, Ignacio, Zapardiel, Obstetrics and gynaecology, CCA - Cancer biology and immunology, CCA - Cancer Treatment and quality of life, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development (AR&D), Ethics, Law & Medical humanities, Chiva L., Zanagnolo V., Querleu D., Martin-Calvo N., Arevalo-Serrano J., Capilna M.E., Fagotti A., Kucukmetin A., Mom C., Chakalova G., Aliyev S., Malzoni M., Narducci F., Arencibia O., Raspagliesi F., Toptas T., Cibula D., Kaidarova D., Meydanli M.M., Tavares M., Golub D., Perrone A.M., Poka R., Tsolakidis D., Vujic G., Jedryka M.A., Zusterzeel P.L.M., Beltman J.J., Goffin F., Haidopoulos D., Haller H., Jach R., Yezhova I., Berlev I., Bernardino M., Bharathan R., Lanner M., Maenpaa M.M., Sukhin V., Feron J.-G., Fruscio R., Kukk K., Ponce J., Minguez J.A., Vazquez-Vicente D., Castellanos T., Chacon E., Alcazar J.L., Chiva, L, Zanagnolo, V, Querleu, D, Martin-Calvo, N, Arévalo-Serrano, J, Căpîlna, M, Fagotti, A, Kucukmetin, A, Mom, C, Chakalova, G, Aliyev, S, Malzoni, M, Narducci, F, Arencibia, O, Raspagliesi, F, Toptas, T, Cibula, D, Kaidarova, D, Meydanli, M, Tavares, M, Golub, D, Perrone, A, Poka, R, Tsolakidis, D, Vujić, G, Jedryka, M, Zusterzeel, P, Beltman, J, Goffin, F, Haidopoulos, D, Haller, H, Jach, R, Yezhova, I, Berlev, I, Bernardino, M, Bharathan, R, Lanner, M, Maenpaa, M, Sukhin, V, Feron, J, Fruscio, R, Kukk, K, Ponce, J, Minguez, J, Vázquez-Vicente, D, Castellanos, T, Chacon, E, Alcazar, J, INSERM, Université de Lille, Protéomique, Réponse Inflammatoire, Spectrométrie de Masse (PRISM) - U1192, Clínica Universidad de Navarra [Pamplona], Istituto Europeo di Oncologia [Milano] [IEO], Institut Bergonié [Bordeaux], Universidad de Navarra [Pamplona] [UNAV], Istituto Europeo di Oncologia [Milano] (IEO), UNICANCER, Universidad de Navarra [Pamplona] (UNAV), Protéomique, Réponse Inflammatoire, Spectrométrie de Masse (PRISM) - U 1192 (PRISM), and Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Université de Lille-Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [Lille] (CHRU Lille)

Subjects
Adult, BIOMEDICINE AND HEALTHCARE. Clinical Medical Sciences, medicine.medical_specialty, Uterine Cervical Neoplasm, cervical cancer, [SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio], 03 medical and health sciences, Young Adult, surgical oncology, 0302 clinical medicine, hysterectomy, laparoscope, cervix uteri, laparotomy, Surgical oncology, local, medicine, Radical Hysterectomy, Prospective cohort study, Cancer staging, Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Cervical cancer, Aged, 80 and over, 030219 obstetrics & reproductive medicine, neoplasm recurrence, local, business.industry, BIOMEDICINA I ZDRAVSTVO. Kliničke medicinske znanosti, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Retrospective cohort study, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedure, Middle Aged, medicine.disease, neoplasm recurrence, Surgery, Women's cancers Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 17], Europe, Settore MED/40 - GINECOLOGIA E OSTETRICIA, laparoscopes, Oncology, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Cohort, Female, Cohort Studie, business, Cohort study, Human
Abstract

SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer FREE http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1908-3251Luis Chiva1, Vanna Zanagnolo2, Denis Querleu3, Nerea Martin- Calvo4, Juan Arévalo-Serrano5, Mihai Emil Căpîlna6, Anna Fagotti7, Ali Kucukmetin8, Constantijne Mom9, Galina Chakalova10, Shamistan Aliyev11, Mario Malzoni12, http://orcid.org/0000- 0001-5809-3535Fabrice Narducci13, Octavio Arencibia14, Francesco Raspagliesi15, Tayfun Toptas16, David Cibula17, Dilyara Kaidarova18, http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6763-9720Mehmet Mutlu Meydanli19, Mariana Tavares20, Dmytro Golub21, http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3140-4772Anna Myriam Perrone22, Robert Poka23, Dimitrios Tsolakidis24, Goran Vujić25, http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8935- 0311Marcin A Jedryka26, Petra L M Zusterzeel27, Jogchum Jan Beltman28, Frederic Goffin29, Dimitrios Haidopoulos30, Herman Haller31, Robert Jach32, Iryna Yezhova33, Igor Berlev34, Margarida Bernardino35, Rasiah Bharathan36, Maximilian Lanner37, Minna M Maenpaa38, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4403-3707Vladyslav Sukhin39, Jean-Guillaume Feron40, Robert Fruscio41, 42, Kersti Kukk43, Jordi Ponce44, Jose Angel Minguez45, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9618- 5606Daniel Vázquez-Vicente45, Teresa Castellanos45, Enrique Chacon46 and http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9700-0853Juan Luis Alcazar47 On behalf of the SUCCOR study Group Author affiliations Abstract Background Minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer has demonstrated in recent publications worse outcomes than open surgery. The primary objective of the SUCCOR study, a European, multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study was to evaluate disease-free survival in patients with stage IB1 (FIGO 2009) cervical cancer undergoing open vs minimally invasive radical hysterectomy. As a secondary objective, we aimed to investigate the association between protective surgical maneuvers and the risk of relapse. Methods We obtained data from 1272 patients that underwent a radical hysterectomy by open or minimally invasive surgery for stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO 2009) from January 2013 to December 2014. After applying all the inclusion-exclusion criteria, we used an inverse probability weighting to construct a weighted cohort of 693 patients to compare outcomes (minimally invasive surgery vs open). The first endpoint compared disease-free survival at 4.5 years in both groups. Secondary endpoints compared overall survival among groups and the impact of the use of a uterine manipulator and protective closure of the colpotomy over the tumor in the minimally invasive surgery group. Results Mean age was 48.3 years (range ; 23–83) while the mean BMI was 25.7 kg/m2 (range ; 15–49). The risk of recurrence for patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery was twice as high as that in the open surgery group (HR, 2.07 ; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.15 ; P=0.001). Similarly, the risk of death was 2.42-times higher than in the open surgery group (HR, 2.45 ; 95% CI, 1.30 to 4.60, P=0.005). Patients that underwent minimally invasive surgery using a uterine manipulator had a 2.76-times higher hazard of relapse (HR, 2.76 ; 95% CI, 1.75 to 4.33 ; P

Published
2020

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results